Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Thursday April 13 2017, @07:31PM   Printer-friendly
from the fugitives-are-people-too dept.

Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard

Kim Dotcom has petitioned the US Supreme Court in the hope of regaining control over millions of dollars in assets that were seized by the US Government. Dotcom's legal team is challenging the finding that as a fugitive, Megaupload's founder has no standing to reclaim his seized property.

[...] However, Dotcom is determined to regain access to his property and has now taken the case to the US Supreme Court. Together with the other defendants, he filed a petition to the Supreme Court to overturn the "fugitive disentitlement" ruling and the forfeiture of his assets.

The crux of the case is whether or not the District Court's order to forfeit an estimated $67 million in assets was right. The defense argues that Dotcom and the other Megaupload defendants were wrongfully labeled as fugitives by the Department of Justice.

Dotcom's legal team warns that, if the current verdict stands, the US Government can seize the assets of foreign nationals based on unproven claims.

Source: https://torrentfreak.com/kim-dotcom-takes-fight-over-seized-millions-to-us-supreme-court-170410/


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by fishybell on Thursday April 13 2017, @11:47PM (1 child)

    by fishybell (3156) on Thursday April 13 2017, @11:47PM (#493708)

    With civil forfeitures the seized assets have no presumption of innocence. Rather, you typically have to prove they are innocent, not just not guilty.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 14 2017, @03:12PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 14 2017, @03:12PM (#494017)

    I think the point was that civil forfeiture is unconstitutional.